Romney's devastating New-START critique

After a long weekend celebrating and reflecting on Freedom, I woke, once again, with the Obamaland Blues.

Mitt Romney's exegesis of New-START, the "revamped" nuclear weapons treaty, is grave in its indictment of what, at best, is irresponsible and, at worst, is willful in its undermining of American power.

-explicitly forbids the United States from converting ICBM silos into missile defense sites

-allows Russia to walk away from the treaty if the United States seeks to shield itself from missiles - we must seek "permission."

-empowers Russia with broad latitude to amend the treaty with specific reference to missile defense

-lets Russia escape the limit on its number of strategic nuclear warheads. ( Loopholes and lapses - carefully crafted by Moscow - provide a path to entirely avoid the advertised warhead-reduction targets)

-forces the United States to drastically reduce its number of launchers while allowing Russia to maintain its current arsenal

-fails to apply the MIRV limits that were part of the prior START treaty, just as Russia is developing a new heavy-load, MIRV-capable ICBM

-gives Russia a massive nuclear advantage over the United States, ignoring tactical nukes where Russia outnumbers us by nearly ten-to-one

There's more, but you get the idea. Romney calls for rejection of the treaty, and one hopes that the Senate concurs and that America, undermined domestically by its president, will not succumb to his foreign policy as well. This isn't a New Start, it's a bad beginning, and for American security, it should and must be shelved.

After a long weekend celebrating and reflecting on Freedom, I woke, once again, with the Obamaland Blues.

Mitt Romney's exegesis of New-START, the "revamped" nuclear weapons treaty, is grave in its indictment of what, at best, is irresponsible and, at worst, is willful in its undermining of American power.

-explicitly forbids the United States from converting ICBM silos into missile defense sites

-allows Russia to walk away from the treaty if the United States seeks to shield itself from missiles - we must seek "permission."

-empowers Russia with broad latitude to amend the treaty with specific reference to missile defense

-lets Russia escape the limit on its number of strategic nuclear warheads. ( Loopholes and lapses - carefully crafted by Moscow - provide a path to entirely avoid the advertised warhead-reduction targets)

-forces the United States to drastically reduce its number of launchers while allowing Russia to maintain its current arsenal

-fails to apply the MIRV limits that were part of the prior START treaty, just as Russia is developing a new heavy-load, MIRV-capable ICBM

-gives Russia a massive nuclear advantage over the United States, ignoring tactical nukes where Russia outnumbers us by nearly ten-to-one

There's more, but you get the idea. Romney calls for rejection of the treaty, and one hopes that the Senate concurs and that America, undermined domestically by its president, will not succumb to his foreign policy as well. This isn't a New Start, it's a bad beginning, and for American security, it should and must be shelved.